Go versus Brand X
robert.kern at gmail.com
Mon Nov 23 18:54:19 CET 2009
On 2009-11-23 04:47 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Le Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:36:33 -0600, Robert Kern a écrit :
>> I think there is an overall design sensibility, it's just not a
>> human-facing one. They claim that they designed the syntax to be very
>> easily parsed by very simple tools in order to make things like syntax
>> highlighters very easy and robust. So indentation-based blocks are right
> But computer languages should be designed to be readable by humans.
> It's not like you need to write a new parser once a year, but you have to
> read code everyday.
You will get no argument from me. My point was only that they had an overall
design sensibility, not that it was a good one.
> Besides, if you want parsing to be easy, you don't need to make the
> syntax minimal, you just have to provide the parsing routines as part of
> the standard library and/or of an external API.
Not really. The idea was to make the language easily parsed and lexed and
analyzed by *other* tools, not written in Go, that may have limited
capabilities. Vim isn't written in Go and won't be able to use their API, for
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
More information about the Python-list